Use of Scientific Method in the Workplace
by SerenityJane
Summary: Owen gets bored, so decides to irritate Ianto...all in the name of science, of course. This story is not in the usual style, so please let me know what you think!


**Use of Scientific Method in the Workplace**

**Subject**

Ianto Jones

**Observer**

Owen Harper

**Theory**

That the Ianto Jones we know and love/hate, rely on/despise is a lie, a façade, a ruse, a mask. What lies beneath the blank, emotionless features, the perfectly groomed figure, the self-effacing manner and the robot-like efficiency is a mystery. A mystery that I, Owen Harper, resident medical specialist of Torchwood Three, have taken upon myself to solve.

What will I find in this descent into the inner workings of the enigmatic Mr Jones? Hopefully a repressed turmoil of dark emotions and desires, a whirlpool of hate and love and lust and unsanitary habits just waiting to be exposed to the world. Or to the rest of Torchwood, at least.

Why, you may ask, is someone as important and sexy as myself volunteering to unmask the inner workings of the tea-boy? In all honesty, I haven't been nearly eaten/killed by an alien life-form in days, Gwen still won't look at me, let alone touch me (because she blames _me _for her cheating on her chubby boyfriend), and I haven't been hands-deep inside the chest (or the alien equivalent of a chest) of a cold corpse for a week. I'm bored.

**Experiment One**

Subject has been observed to be a very tidy individual. Object of Experiment One is to see how subject reacts to negative stimuli. Method used will be dirty crockery strategically placed around the subject's workplace.

**1****st**** Attempt:**  
Made on 5th March 2007 at approximately 9.00am

Observer collected the dirty coffee-mugs of subjects' co-workers, namely Captain Jack Harkness, Toshiko Sato, and Gwen Cooper, as well as his own, and strategically placed them around the central hub.

Subject collected dirty coffee mugs without comment.

**2****nd**** Attempt:**  
Made on 6th March 2007 at approximately 9.00am

Observer again collected dirty mugs and placed them around the central hub.

Subject collected dirty mugs without complaint

**3****rd**** Attempt:**  
Made on 7th March 2007 at approximately 9.00am

Observer collected the dirty mugs and placed them around the central hub, this time in places where mugs would not usually be found. One was placed on top of the container containing the severed hand, another was thrown in the pool of water surrounding the spire, the third mug was placed on the staircase between the second and third levels of the hub, and the final mug was put in the lab, placed in the hand of Geoffrey, the observer's plastic human skeleton.

Subject located all mugs in a surprisingly short time and collected them without complaint.

**4****th**** attempt:**  
_Was _to have been made by the observer on 8th March 2007.

On this day the subject did not dispense hot beverages as is his usual habit. No crockery was available for dispersal.

**5****th**** attempt  
**_Was _to have been made by the observer on 9th March 2007.

Subject again broke his usual pattern of behavior and did not dispense drinks. When subject was questioned by a co-worker, Captain Jack Harkness (read 'the boss') as to why no coffee or tea had been forthcoming, the previous day or that morning, subject smiled blandly in response, then suggested that the boss ask Owen (read 'the observer').

**Note  
**Experiment One was halted prematurely by interference from the subjects' co-workers who, suffering from caffeine deprivation, set upon the observer (read 'victim') and threatened bodily harm to him if the experimentation was not discontinued.

**Observation  
**Subject took action immediately after the third attempt, either because it was at that time he became aware that the mug dispersal was being done deliberately, or because the third attempt was the first time he was severely inconvenienced.

Subject did not confront the perpetrator directly, instead responded in a non-aggressive manner by depriving the perpetrator of means with which to continue his irritating behavior. This deprivation led to interference from the subject's co-workers. The observer is of the opinion that the subject intentionally manipulated events so that his co-workers (read 'interfering pricks') became involved, and confronted the observer/perpetrator in his stead. Observer is unaware at this time how the subject knew who the perpetrator was.

**Result  
**This experiment showed the subject to be passive-aggressive, preferring to solve problems indirectly. He is also manipulative, and particularly observant. Further experimentation is needed.

**Experiment Two**

Subject has been observed to be very concerned about his appearance. Object of Experiment Two is to see how subject reacts to negative stimuli. Method used will vary.

**Attempt 1  
**Observer ordered Spaghetti Bolognese for lunch. Upon the meal being delivered to the observer by the subject, the observer endeavored to spill the meal on the subjects' pristine white shirt. This attempt was unsuccessful, as subject managed to step back before the pasta impacted with his shirt. However, subject did not move swiftly enough to avoid the pasta hitting his shoes and the lower part of his trousers.

Upon the observer's apology, the subject said not to worry, and that the damage done to his shoes and trousers did not show, and he was sure it would come out in the wash. Subject then smiled slightly, in what the observer took to be a slightly smug manner.

**Observation  
**Damage done by the Napolitano sauce and meatballs to the subjects clothing and subsequent appearance was minimal. Subject's swift movement resulted in avoidance of the majority of damage intended by the observer. Nonetheless, subjects' lack of reaction was surprising, as the observer recognized the brand of shoes the subject was wearing to be from the Moschino 2007 Fall-Winter collection, which are reasonably expensive. By the subject's swift movement, it appears he either has a very short reaction-time, or was expecting an attempt to be made. Subject may have been tipped off by observer's request to have his meal removed from the take-away container and placed in a bowl, which is not the observer's usual habit.

**Attempt 2  
**Observer enlisted the assistance of one Toshiko Sato for this attempt. Her assistance was obtained by blackmail (observer threatened to disclose to a co-worker by the name of Ms Gwen Cooper that a copy of the security forage showing a 'make out session' between the observer and Ms Cooper in the laboratory had somehow made it into Ms Sato's private collection).

Whilst subject was occupied in Archives, observer moved into the kitchen and made a bowl of tomato soup, using instant soup satchels. Upon the subject returning to the central hub, Toshiko Sato intercepted him and requested his opinion on a scan she had recently conducted on a new addition to the Torchwood collection of alien artifacts, the results of which were displayed on her computer screen. Subject agreed to assist and followed her to her work station.

After giving subject time to become engrossed in the scan, observer approached quietly and stood directly behind subject. Subject did not appear to notice. After offering his opinion to Ms Sato, subject turned and walked into observer, resulting in the spillage of red soup down the front of the subject's shirt and jacket. Subject stumbled, then recovered his balance. Subject winced slightly, then looked down at his shirt. Upon hearing the observer's apology, subject muttered, 'I'm sure,' under his breath. He then said not to worry, he has a spare. Subject then walked past observer and down the stairs, presumably to locate his spare shirt. The observer, encouraged by the subject's wince, pursued the subject in the hopes of observing a further reaction.

Observer followed subject to the bathroom, where subject turned his back to the observer and removed his jacket. Subject then requested that the observer retrieve his spare shirt from the cupboard in the reception area. Seeing no way to refuse without seeming suspicious, the observer left the bathroom to retrieve the shirt. Upon returning to the bathroom, observer saw the subject standing before the mirror with a towel about his hips, examining the red mark on his chest. Observer was surprised at the number of scars he could see across the subject's back. Subject then turned, folding his arms over his chest, hiding the mark. Observer handed the subject his shirt and then left the room.

**Observation  
**Observer did witness a reaction by the subject after staining his shirt with the soup, however it is unclear at this stage whether the wince was a reaction to the damage to his shirt or the unexpected pain of the burn, caused by the hot soup, which the observer had not taken into account when planning this attempt. Observer would like to state that the assistant, Toshiko Sato, was not fully apprised of the observer's intentions beforehand, and would surely have pointed out this rather large flaw had she been fully briefed.

Observer also witnessed a reaction when the subject attempted to discretely cover the result of this experiment (ie the burn mark) when he realized that he was not alone in the bathroom. Subject appears to dislike being observed to be in pain, perhaps having a fear of showing weakness.

Results from this test are inconclusive. Further attempts will be carried out, without the assistance of Ms Sato.

**Attempt 3  
**On a Friday before departing the office for the weekend, observer placed a foul-smelling cheese inside the cupboard in the reception area where the subject keeps his spare sets of clothing. Once the cupboard door was closed, the smell could not be detected from elsewhere in the room. The cheese was left in the cupboard during the weekend.

On the following Monday, observer 'tripped' when he passed the subject on the stairwell, whilst holding a glass of red cordial. Subject did not respond to observer's apology. Subject stared at the observer for about ten seconds without reacting to the red cordial dripping from his hair and down his face onto his clothing. Subject then turned and walked back down the stairs then through the hub in the direction of the reception area, presumably to retrieve a spare set of clothing from the cupboard. Observer followed. Upon opening the cupboard, subject wrinkled his nose then bent over, picking up the wheel of cheese left there the previous week. Observer then apologized, saying that he had forgot he left that in there.

Subject did not respond. He placed the cheese on the corner of his desk, and reached into the cupboard, retrieving one of his shirts. After smelling the shirt, subject placed it back inside the cupboard.

Subject then moved to the front section of the reception area, where brochures and other items are kept for tourists to look at or purchase. Subject retrieved a shirt from the small merchandise section and shook it out. He examined the design on the shirt, which the observer saw was a stylized picture of the Millennium Centre, under which was emblazoned the phrase, "I Love Cardiff." Subject sighed and then moved over to his desk where he depressed the button which opened the doorway leading to the hub. Subject then walked through the door and into the hallway. Observer followed, closing the door behind him.

Observer then found himself pinned to the wall by a hand at his throat. Observer was methodically stripped by the subject whilst held pinned against the wall, until he wore nothing but grey boxer shorts. Subject then told the observer that his clothes will be left on his desk, and walked down the hallway into the hub.

After freeing his hands from the belt the subject had used to secure them, the observer walked through the central hub to his desk, ignoring the questions and disparaging remarks of his co-workers. Upon reaching his desk, observer noted that the subject had returned his jeans, however his shirt had been replaced by the tourist shirt retrieved by the subject earlier. Observer then noticed the subject emerge into the hub from the direction of the bathroom, hair wet and slicked back, the observer's black shirt stretched tight across his chest.

When asked by the boss (read giver-of-disparaging-comments) what was going on, subject smiled slightly and mentioned a 'wardrobe malfunction', then returned to the reception area, leaving the door locked behind him. Subject ignored repeated requests by the observer to unlock the door.

Despite subject's confident demeanor during this confrontation, viewing of security footage of the reception area showed that subject seemed to be uncomfortable, to an extent unwarranted by the shirt's tight fit.

Subject sat working at his desk for roughly twenty minutes, then got up and walked to the cupboard, as if considering changing his clothes in spite of the smell. Subject then returned to his desk, and continued to work.

Another twenty minutes later, subject got up and tidied the reception area, straightening the brochures and refolding all of the t-shirts. He then returned to his desk where he worked for another forty minutes. Subject then stood up and tidied the reception area once more, refolded the shirts, then dusted the shelves.

This behavior continued throughout the observer's surveillance.

**Observation  
**It seems that once the subject is put into a position where there is a choice between direct confrontation and potential embarrassment, he will confront directly. The subject is not averse to using violence, however according to observations made in Experiment One, nonphysical solutions seem to be preferred. It should be noted that at no stage during the confrontation did the subject show any emotion other than slight annoyance, and perhaps amusement at the position the observer had been placed in as a result of that confrontation. Subject is also stronger than he appears.

Actions taken against the observer by the subject might be considered extreme if the subject believed the observer's actions were accidental. The observer is therefore of the belief that the subject was aware that his actions were intentional.

Behaviors exhibited by subject whilst he believed himself to be unobserved in the reception area are of concern.

Whilst the observer has in the past noticed the subject to be unusually well-groomed and tidy, observer does not recall witnessing this obsessive behaviour in the subject before. As the subject does not seem to be concerned by his own actions, observer infers that this is not new behavior. It is therefore likely that the subject exhibits this behavior only when he believes himself to be unobserved, in effect hiding it.

It is possible that subject suffers from OCD (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder) or OCPD (Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder). Evidence so far would indicate that the subject suffers from OCD, as one of the main characteristics of OCPD is perfection at the expense of efficiency, and although the subject does seem to be a perfectionist, the observer has never witnessed him as anything other than efficient. However, to be certain of which disorder applies in this situation, the reason behind the subject's obsessive cleaning will need to be determined. Once the disorder has been diagnosed and the reason behind it has been found, the severity of the condition can be judged and, if necessary, treatment will begin.

* * *

A/N

This was a lot of fun to write - hope you enjoyed reading as much as I enjoyed writing!

I have a poll going at the mo (started 15th November 2007), if you'd like to participate! The question is: if one of the main Torchwood characters had to die a particularly gruesome, PERMANENT death, who would you rather say goodbye to? Go to my Bio to vote - it should show at the top of the screen. If enough people vote, I will write a story about the demise of the 'winner.'

Thanks for reading!


End file.
